zlacker

[return to "Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice"]
1. anon37+t5[view] [source] 2024-05-20 22:58:41
>>mjcl+(OP)
Well, that statement lays out a damning timeline:

- OpenAI approached Scarlett last fall, and she refused.

- Two days before the GPT-4o launch, they contacted her agent and asked that she reconsider. (Two days! This means they already had everything they needed to ship the product with Scarlett’s cloned voice.)

- Not receiving a response, OpenAI demos the product anyway, with Sam tweeting “her” in reference to Scarlett’s film.

- When Scarlett’s counsel asked for an explanation of how the “Sky” voice was created, OpenAI yanked the voice from their product line.

Perhaps Sam’s next tweet should read “red-handed”.

◧◩
2. nickth+R7[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:10:38
>>anon37+t5
This statement from scarlet really changed my perspective. I use and loved the Sky voice and I did feel it sounded a little like her, but moreover it was the best of their voice offerings. I was mad when they removed it. But now I’m mad it was ever there to begin with. This timeline makes it clear that this wasn’t a coincidence and maybe not even a hiring of an impressionist (which is where things get a little more wishy washy for me).
◧◩◪
3. crimso+y9[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:19:08
>>nickth+R7
But it's clearly not her voice right? The version that's been on the app for a year just isn't. Like, it clearly intending to be slightly reminiscent of her, but it's also very clearly not. Are we seriously saying we can't make voices that are similar to celebrities, when not using their actual voice?
◧◩◪◨
4. gedy+2b[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:29:45
>>crimso+y9
Normally I'd agree if this were some vague "artist style", but this was clearly an attempt to duplicate a living person, a media celebrity no less.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. threat+Sb[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:35:05
>>gedy+2b
Is this different from the various videos of the Harry Potter actors doing comedic high fashion ads? Because those were very well received.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipuqLy87-3A

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. tsimio+zj[view] [source] 2024-05-21 00:22:38
>>threat+Sb
That has a much better chance of falling under fair use (parody, non-commercial) if the actors ever tried to sue.

There is a major difference between parodying someone by imitating them while clearly and almost explicitly being an imitation; and deceptively imitating someone to suggest they are associated with your product in a serious manner.

[go to top]